Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Hardfork to retroactively correct referral percentages #453

Closed
theoreticalbts opened this issue Nov 19, 2015 · 0 comments
Closed

Hardfork to retroactively correct referral percentages #453

theoreticalbts opened this issue Nov 19, 2015 · 0 comments
Assignees
@bytemaster
Labels
awaiting review
Milestone
next

Comments

@theoreticalbts
Copy link
Contributor

Hardfork described here:

"The BitShares community should collectively look after the all users and roll out a hardfork that implements the behavior intended by the CLI wallet. Cryptonomex will provide the code for the hardfork "free of charge" and roll it out as part of the next scheduled hardfork. The hard fork will treat percentages below 1% as 100x larger. So 0.6% will become 60% as intended by the users involved."
theoreticalbts added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 20, 2015
@theoreticalbts
Hardfork to retroactively correct referral percentages #453
084e387
This was referenced Nov 20, 2015
Closed
Closed
Closed
@theoreticalbts theoreticalbts added this to the next milestone Nov 23, 2015
theoreticalbts added a commit to peertracksinc/muse that referenced this issue Jan 15, 2016
@theoreticalbts
hardfork.d: Set hardfork date for hardforks cryptonomex#436 cryptonom…
12f900b 
…ex#445 cryptonomex#453 cryptonomex#480 cryptonomex#483
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2018
@oxarbitrage
Merge pull request cryptonomex#546 from pmconrad/issue_453_log
10a15ca 
Log message for issue cryptonomex#453
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Apr 17, 2018
@abitmore
Test case reproduces cryptonomex#338 cryptonomex#343 cryptonomex#453 c…
10298ca 
…ryptonomex#606 cryptonomex#625 cryptonomex#649
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Apr 17, 2018
@abitmore
Market engine improvements.
b2a86dd 
For:
* cryptonomex#338 Margin call order fills at price of matching limit_order
* cryptonomex#343 Inconsistent sorting of call orders between matching against a limit order and a force settle order
* cryptonomex#453 Multiple limit order and call order matching issue
* cryptonomex#606 Undercollateralized short positions should be called regardless of asks
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Apr 17, 2018
@abitmore
Test case for cryptonomex#338 cryptonomex#343 cryptonomex#453 crypton…
e5fc5d4 
…omex#606 cryptonomex#625 cryptonomex#649 fixes
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Apr 17, 2018
@abitmore
Add cross-hardfork tests cryptonomex#338 cryptonomex#343 cryptonomex#453
a8391d8 
 cryptonomex#606 cryptonomex#649
pmconrad pushed a commit to pmconrad/graphene that referenced this issue Aug 10, 2018
@abitmore
Added logging for the old update_expired_feeds bug
adb7785 
The old bug is cryptonomex#615 .

Due to the bug, `update_median_feeds()` and `check_call_orders()`
will be called when a feed is not actually expired, normally this
should not affect consensus since calling them should not change
any data in the state.

However, the logging indicates that `check_call_orders()` did
change some data under certain circumstances, specifically, when
multiple limit order matching issue (cryptonomex#453) occurred at same block.
* bitshares/bitshares-core#453
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@bytemaster bytemaster

Labels
awaiting review
Projects
None yet
Milestone
next
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@bytemaster @theoreticalbts